The Psychological function of Theodicy

Over the years, no theological subject has consumed quite as much of my time in sermons and pastoral counseling and teaching and writing as the subject of Theodicy has. Theodicy is the classical problem of how to view evil, suffering, and death in light of the claim that God is real, and God really is good and powerful and wise. It is the question of how to justify this Good God in light of a world filled to the brim with horrific suffering, or at least how to justify us who believe there is such a God. I have written essays about it, made charts detailing it, and reviewed books about it. And almost all of that has been spent in describing the objective state of affairs in the world in light of Theodicy: Is God real or not? Is God good or not?

But I have not spent a whole lot of time talking about how the problems– and “solutions”-- of Theodicy function for those of us who are engaged in this discussion. Here I would like to dive a little deeper into an area I skim the surface of in my longest essay on the Monstrosity of Theodicy:

Evil and things that go Bump in the Night

A Sermon for Halloween based on Ephesians 6.10-18

[10] Be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power. [11] Put on the full armor of God, so that you can take your stand against the devil’s schemes. [12] For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the forces of evil in the spiritual realms. 

[13] Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand. [14] Stand firm then, with the belt of truth buckled around your waist, with the breastplate of justice in place, [15] and with your feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the good news of peace. 

[16] In addition to all this, take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one. [17] Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God. [18] And pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and requests. With this in mind, be alert and always keep on praying for all the Lord’s people. 

Why God cannot be evil

Recently I was in a discussion in which someone asked whether God could be evil. Is it possible that the Ultimate Reality that is the source of all other realities is actually malevolent? Fortunately, it is both an evidential and a logical impossibility for God to be evil. God cannot be evil due to both an a priori reason (a reason which comes prior to experience in the world) and an a posteriori reason (a reason which comes from reflection on experience in the world). 

De Chardin on the necessity of evil in a finite creation

For three decades I have actively pondered and written on the problem of evil and sin. We could sum it up this way: If God is so good, how come life is often so bad? This problem has no one single answer, and is addressed in several overlapping perspectives. But today I was again reading some of the writings of the scientist-theologian Teilhard De Chardin, and he helped me describe yet another perspective that has been bubbling up inside my prayer and meditation for a decade or more. Over 100 years ago, he wrote this:

“We often represent God to ourselves as being able to draw from non-being a world without sorrows, faults, dangers--a world in which there is no damage, no breakage. This is a conceptual fantasy, and makes it impossible to solve the problem of evil. No, we have to accept that in spite of his power God cannot obtain a creature united to himself without necessarily engaging in a struggle with some evil.” (Teilhard De Chardin, Christianity and Evolution: Reflections on Science and Religion, location 360)

In this, and the rest of the essay after this, I hear him saying the following:

Did Christ have to die on the Cross?

On Holy Saturday I often do a lot of thinking about the meaning of the Cross and Death of Christ. I've written before about how I explain the meaning of Christ's death, and the role it plays in bringing atonement, or "at-one-ment", with God through Christ. But here I would like to ponder the meaning of Christ's death in light of the questions: Did Christ have to die? If so, did that death have to happen by crucifixion? In what sense did God "will" for Christ to die, or even "cause" Christ's death?

Noah's Flood and God's Justice

Lots of people have lots of questions about the flood of Noah in Genesis 6-9. Why did it happen? How did it happen? And who were those pesky Nephilim? I have answered many of these questions in another article. But another perennial question is how does the God of Wrath displayed in the Flood story relate to the God of Love seen in Jesus Christ. How can the evil of the Flood be justified in the light of the Goodness of God? Although I have touched on this in other articles on Divine Violence and Divine Sorrow, I would like to write more here on how the Flood connects with the larger problem of God and Evil.

Where there's smoke...

I often feel like we are in a culture where most people have been systematically desensitized to smelling smoke or seeing fire. And we are in the precarious position of either (a) screaming “Hey! Your house is on fire! Escape now!” Which almost certainly will get ignored as the ravings of insane people. Or (b) being put in the absurd position of saying “Perhaps you might consider that your house *could* be on fire. I mean, I’m no expert on house fires of course. But here are ten common warning signs of being in a house on fire. Oh? You don’t like those because they come from an anti-fire fake news source? Ok. I understand. Here’s a news source that you like which gives five indicators of house fire. Perhaps you might think about it. And, um, if it’s not too much trouble, I dunno, kinda think about leaving your house. Just for a little while. Nothing too drastic of course.” (cf. Buddha’s parable of the children in the burning house)

Religion is in retreat! All hail the new gods!

Recently a spate of articles have come out showing, yet again, the rise of “The Nones”, who have no religious affiliation, while traditional religions continue to decline. While there is truth to this trend-- predominantly white Christian expressions in the USA are in decline in terms of numbers-- this is not the whole story. For a better insight into the polling data, I would look at Pew Religion. They offer some explanations to go along with the current American data, which is reflective of the European decline of religion last century, but not reflective of the growth of religion in Asia, Africa, and much of South America. However, there is no definitive explanation of why the decline in some places, and rise in others. So, let's take a look at one theory...

Bart Ehrman, Theodicy, and Leaving Evangelicalism

Recently I posted a chart about various models of dealing with "Theodicy" (the problem of how evil and God can co-exist in the same reality). Someone asked me if I had read the 2009 book by New Testament scholar Bart Ehrman on Theodicy entitled "God's Problem". Now I have read a couple of Ehrman books on Biblical studies, and heave seen several of his debates, lectures, and interviews (including him talking about his deconversion and the problem of suffering). But I have never read this book, although I have heard him sum it up several times in his videos on YouTube.

Ehrman's book and his talks strike me as having very similar themes to other books I have read, particularly by Evangelicals who have lost their faith. As a former Evangelical, I have experienced much of what Ehrman (and others like him) have experienced, except that it turned me to a broader and deeper faith in Christ rather than abandoning Christ. While I disagree with Ehrman on several core ideas, from the Divinity of Christ to the basic reliability of Scripture, I do find him to be a rational, honest, and well-intentioned thinker who is pursuing the truth as best he can. Erman’s story, as I understand it, points out several gaping holes (or persistent heresies) in American Evangelicalism:

Models of Theodicy Chart

How do we deal with God allowing evil and suffering? This ever-daunting "Problem of Evil" is one of the biggest perennial problems in Theology and the Philosophy of Religion. The academic name for this problem is "Theodicy", and it is one of the things I have blogged about the most on this website, with articles big and small discussing the problem from all kinds of perspectives. Today in teaching Philosophy, we talked about the subject once again. And as a result I decided to turn my class notes into a chart. 

You will note that it lays out the essential logic of the problem of Theodicy in a flowchart of options which are either affirming to the reality of God, or which diminish or deny the reality of God. I have even further simplified this flowchart into an image which can be displayed on one slide as part of a presentation or sermon:

If you would like to use these charts or image, you can click the image above, or download the charts in PDF or JPEG here.

.

On Socially Engineered Tragedies

Another day, another mass shooting. Same event, different location. Sometimes more are dead, sometimes less. The plot is depressingly and predictably redundant, except when it is your loved one who is sacrificed in the story. As various newspapers have pointed out, this is now almost literally a daily event*. Part of the background noise. Just another news item to ignore as we work our 60 hour weeks just to keep our heads above water. 

Eyes to see

If you don't believe

In the East's endless cycle of Samsara
In the West's Fall into Original Sin
In Nietzsche's Eternal Return

Watch TV's talking heads
Read your news feed
Stand in line at the DMV

And you will know

Precious few claims in religion
Can be subjected to empirical proof
Repeated, observable, concrete

But this is at the head
Of that short list
Of universal human experiences

If you have eyes to see.

A Short Meditation on Evolution and Original Sin

This summer a friend asked me a great question about how Evolution and Original Sin can relate to each other. To get to my answer, I must first do a little theological back filling to set the stage for the question. First, I accept evolution as the means by which God "creates" life, although I would prefer to say that evolution is the self-expression of infinite Divine potential in space and time. If I were to bet, I would bet that the universe is actually a multiverse, in which every universe exists that can actualize at least one unique good as it evolves. This seems to be the kind of reality that would best actualize God's infinite possibility, although what I'm about to say would work in a singular universe as well.

The Monstrosity of Theodicy

For many, the greatest possible objection to belief in God-- and often the most painfully personal-- is the existence of immense amounts of pain and suffering in the universe. From Christian apologist CS Lewis, to Catholic philosopher Peter Kreeft, to Jewish Rabbi Harold S. Kushner, to "new atheist" Christopher Hitchens, to conservative Evangelical Alvin Plantinga, to liberal physicist-cum-theologian John Polkinghorne *1, there is a wide swath of agreement that this very problem forms the key objection to theism in general, and Christianity in particular. It can be stated in many ways: "Why does God allow bad things to happen to good people?" "Why would a good God allow evil to destroy his creation?" "How  could God allow [insert name of tragedy] to happen to [insert name(s) of victim(s)]?"

Theodicy in Outline

In light of the recent Boston Bombings, I thought I would publish the following notes on the problem of Theodicy. This is, admittedly, an academic rather than pastoral treatment of the problem of suffering. I figure many people will be doing pastoral works over the next few days and weeks. I thought I would instead publish something that is both academic and readable by the average person.

The following is a teaching outline for discussing the problem of suffering in the light of a God who is said to be both all-good (desiring the full flourishing of all persons made in God's image) and all-powerful (able to bring about the full flourishing of those he desires good for). Thus experiences of suffering and tragedy cause us to question the goodness, power, and existence of God. This is a skeletal outline intended mainly as lecture notes.

The Joker, Mass Murder, and Metanarratives

Within hours after the Aurora shooting, people were predictably asking "Why?"

Why would an intelligent young man dress up like "The Joker", arm himself to the teeth, booby trap his apartment, and then go on a rampage that kills and maims dozens, only to give himself up without a fight?

Speculations have ranged from mental illness to demon possession to blaming moral relativism in society. A particularly helpful take on the connection between the murders and the "Joker" is found here:

Stop the Storm or Ride the Rapids?

A Sermon by Nathan L. Bostian
For Year B, Proper 7, based on Mark 4:35-41

When I read stories like today's Gospel reading- stories where Jesus does something awesome that literally moves heaven and earth- I often find myself asking a question that goes something like this:

"Jesus, why don't you calm MY storms like that?"

Have you ever found yourself wondering the same thing? Have you ever found yourself drowning in trouble, knocked back and forth by waves of anger and sorrow and frustration and fear, wondering "Where is God in this?".

HARD QUESTIONS

A Sermon For Year B, First Lent
Copyright © 2009 Nathan L. Bostian
Based on Gen 9:8-17, 1Pe 3:18-22, Mar 1:9-13, Psa 25:3-9

Well, once again it is Lent. Four days after Ash Wednesday. Six weeks until Easter. We have just begun our yearly journey into the wilderness with Jesus.

Lent is a time when we ask hard questions of ourselves, and our relationship with God. No, I don't mean questions like "What will accessorize with purple?" I don't even mean "How do I get this darn streak of ashes out of my shirt?"

I mean hard questions about our failures and weaknesses. Questions about our motives and desires. Questions about whether all of these things are drawing us into Christ, growing us into Love, and helping become healthier people emotionally, mentally, and spiritually.

WHAT'S SO SINFUL ABOUT SIN?

A Sermon For Year A, First Lent

Copyright © 2008 Nathan L. Bostian

Based on Genesis 2-3; Romans 5:12-19; Psalm 51; John 1:9-18

What's so sinful about sin? Why is sin so bad? What is all the fuss about?

I mean, if you read what Paul says in Romans, you would think the world is going to heck in a handbasket. He talks about sin entering the world through Adam, and then death happening because of sin... And eventually, like a bad Rambo movie, sin kills everyone.

It sounds like whatever sin is, it must be horrible. And whoever this Adam guy is, he must have REALLY screwed up royally.

So, you turn to the beginning to find out what all went down to make everything go bad, and what you find is... well... let's be honest here... childish.

In fact, the story looks more like a children's fantasy than an explanation about how the world got so botched. A children's story with nudity, that is.

Kill 'em all, let God sort 'em out?

Today, a friend named Jake facebooked me this question:

-----------------------------
From Today's English Version Good News Bible: Deuteronomy 3:3 So the Lord also placed King Og and his people in our power and we slaughtered them all.

SLAUGHTERED.

Slaughtered seems a bit rough dontcha think? Why was God getting his people to be so violent and if it weren't God's intentions to be so gruesome dontcha think he would have stepped in? Continued in that chapter verses 6 and 7 speak of having put to death men, women and children and then taking livestock and plundering the towns.

Something about that seems wrong. If it were huge sinners that God ordered to be killed that might be different, but then we probably wouldn't be taking their livestock because I would think them to be "plagued by the sin of their owners" or something of that nature. So what's the deal?
-----------------------------

My Answer: